VMDCAD Graphic & Technologies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi V. ITO, New Delhi

ITA 119/DEL/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3762 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-06-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 16-06-2011
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2011
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SRUJANI MOHANTY
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

ITA NO. 119/DEL/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH H NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI A.D. JAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 119/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2007-08 VMDCAD GRAPHIC & TECHNOLOGIES PVT. LTD., 90/31B, 1 ST FLOOR, MALVIYA NAGAR, NEW DELHI 110 017 (PAN : AACCV 0677M) VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD-17(1), CR BUILDING, NEW DELHI (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSEESSEE BY : NONE DEPARTMENT BY : MS. SRUJANI MOHANTY, SR. D.R. ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER PER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM SHAMIM YAHYA: AM SHAMIM YAHYA: AM SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 19.10. 2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. AT THE OUTSET, ASSESSEE HAS RAISED ISSUE THAT L D. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN DISMISSING THE AP PEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE MERITS AND FACTS O F THE CASE AND WITHOUT GIVING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING. ITA NO. 119/DEL/2011 2 3. IN THIS CASE, ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF EXEMPTION U/S 10B OF THE ACT MADE BY THE ASSESSEE AND COMPUTED TOTAL INCOME OF 6,25,950/-. 4. ASSESSEES APPEALED AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER BEFO RE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 5. THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DECID ED THE CASE EXPARTE. FURTHERMORE, LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DID NOT DEAL WITH THE MERITS OF THE CASE IN A SPEAKING ORDER. HE MERELY REPRODUCED THE ASSESSING OFFICER S ORDER AND AFFIR MED THE SAME. 6. AGAINST THE ABOVE ORDER, THE ASSESSEE IS IN APPE AL BEFORE US. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESS EE. IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, SUCH AN ACTION ON THE PART OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) IS NOT SUSTAINA BLE. THE HONBLE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S SAHARA INDIA (FARMS) VS. CIT & ANR. 300 ITR 403 HAS HELD THAT EVEN AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORD ER HAS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. THUS, IN OUR CONSIDERED OPINION, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, THE MATTER SHO ULD BE REMITTED TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE SAME AFRESH. ITA NO. 119/DEL/2011 3 7.1 LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE DID NOT HAVE AN Y SERIOUS OBJECTION TO THIS PROPOSITION. 8. ACCORDINGLY, THE ISSUES IN THE APPEAL STAND REMI TTED TO THE FILES OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE SAME AFRE SH. NEEDLESS TO ADD THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16/6/2011 UPO N CONCLUSION OF HEARING. SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - SD/ SD/ SD/ SD/- -- - [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [A.D. JAIN] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 16/6/2011 SRB COPY FORWARD COPY FORWARD COPY FORWARD COPY FORWARDED TO: ED TO: ED TO: ED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT TRUE COPY BY ORDER, ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, DELHI BENCHES